Keep an eye on how police cameras are used

 You're being watched. We all are. It's a fact of modern life.

That cell phone in your pocket? Service providers have a constant digital track of its position and movements. Did you enter a bank, a government building or a hospital today? You were on camera. Ditto if you used self-checkout at a grocery store. Did you kill an hour doom-scrolling online? If you didn't hide your clicks, then sophisticated algorithms took notice of everything you viewed. If you're at a public venue, there's a good chance someone's recording video. Even if you're just relaxing on your patio — well, most of us have been buzzed by a drone.

Given these realities, we can understand why some Rochester residents might yawn about the installation of automatic license plate recognition cameras in areas where car thefts are relatively common. Two such cameras (funded through a state grant) were installed last week along 41st Street Northwest, and RPD on Monday got the city council's unanimous approval to seek federal funding for four more.

These aren't the notorious "gotcha" cameras that cite drivers for speeding or running a red light. They don't photograph faces. They don't look for handheld cell phone use or other signs of distracted driving. The sole purpose of these cameras is to take pictures of license plates, which can help law enforcement agencies track a stolen vehicle or a car linked to a crime or an Amber Alert.

License readers helped identify the suspect in the shooting of Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette. Nationwide, this technology has been instrumental in solving numerous major crimes.

So, what's the problem?

Well, just a day after Rochester gave the go-ahead to seek more cameras, another news outlet reported that several Minnesota cities have turned off their license readers, or removed them entirely, due to concerns about how the data they collect was stored and with whom it was shared. Flock Safety, which is a major provider of these camera systems, has acknowledged the possibility that some law enforcement agencies have accidentally allowed unauthorized access to the data that Flock cameras have collected.

In Wisconsin, for example, two police officers have been charged after they allegedly used Flock license readers to track the movements of a girlfriend and ex-girlfriend. In Kansas and Georgia, police chiefs have faced similar charges. Incidents like these are likely why more than 30 cities canceled contracts with Flock in the first two months of this year.

Finally, we can't ignore the elephant in the room: Given Minnesota's recent experience with ICE enforcement, some people worry that federal agencies have gained access — without warrants — to license reader data.

The good news is that Rochester deliberately opted for a different camera provider, Axon, which also provides RPD's body cameras. The data collected by the cameras will be owned and fully controlled not by Axon but by RPD, and it will be released only in response to a judicial warrant.

Fair enough. Given that Rochester saw 120 auto thefts in 2024 and 88 in 2025, we see potential value in a system that could help recover stolen vehicles and bring thieves to justice. If that system costs the city virtually nothing, so much the better. And, if these cameras someday aid in the rescue of just one abducted child, they'd be worth their weight in gold.

Still, we can't help but ask, "Who will watch the watchers?" We're glad that the data won't be controlled by some third party, but we would like to hear more about the safeguards RPD will implement to ensure that no police officer, city official or anyone else can access this data for self-serving purposes. Just last year, a former Olmsted County Jail deputy admitted taking screen captures from surveillance videos of female prisoners in changing areas.

Stuff happens. People make bad choices, and sometimes the wrong person gets a badge.

We don't question the intent of RPD Chief Jim Franklin, who told the city council, "As we adopt these tools, we are going to do it through transparency, accountability and respect for constitutional rights." We hope that plan is fulfilled.

But a couple years from now, we hope these cameras will be showing some positive results — and more importantly, that RPD has never had occasion to say, "Sorry for the data breach. We won't let it happen again."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/editorial-keep-eye-police-cameras-172100483.html